Before you request to join this community, here's what we look for when accepting members:

1. Real people only. No pages or incognitos.2. Complete profile, demonstrating experience in SEO.3. No spam and link drops.

What to share?We're all busy so try not to post anything that's not informative or a genuine question/observation. Avoid dropping links with no context or sharing very obvious news we've all heard about (e.g. Search Engine Land). Asking questions is fine, but avoid very simple issues which you can resolve by searching in Google.

Membership Perks:Be the first to find out what's cooking at Dejan Labs. Learn about our discoveries in the field of SEO. Participate in our SEO experiments. Learn from the best people in the SEO community.

Filter



All posts

Discussion

Findings & Observations

SEO Experiments

Questions

Hangouts on Air

Membership

Tools

SEO Panel

Trusted SEO professionals.

Ask to join

1,023 members

- Public

SEO Panel

Trusted SEO professionals.

Ask to join

About Community



Before you request to join this community, here's what we look for when accepting members:

1. Real people only. No pages or incognitos.2. Complete profile, demonstrating experience in SEO.3. No spam and link drops.

What to share?We're all busy so try not to post anything that's not informative or a genuine question/observation. Avoid dropping links with no context or sharing very obvious news we've all heard about (e.g. Search Engine Land). Asking questions is fine, but avoid very simple issues which you can resolve by searching in Google.

Membership Perks:Be the first to find out what's cooking at Dejan Labs. Learn about our discoveries in the field of SEO. Participate in our SEO experiments. Learn from the best people in the SEO community.

Watch my stream for information on the upcoming Search Geeks Speak where +David Harry, +Bill Slawski, +Kevin Doory and +Doc Sheldon and myself will discuss Technical SEO Audits. If you have questions you can ask them on the event page:https://plus.google.com/events/c0ge1uq83nltslivbnb859rbmho

Hello fellow SEOr's. Can any of you provide any information on ASO ranking strategies as well as any help on getting a "Featured" listing within the App Stores?

I appreciate the help.

Thank you!

Joe Chasse: Obviously, apply SEO best practices to the app info. when submitting to App Store. Featured listings are typically based on the quantity of installs over a specific window of time. You can't really game the system here. I also recommend getting lots of app reviews, if they're plentiful and positive it will help in app ranking. Keep in mind uninstalls and negative reviews will hurt.

Has anyone carried out a HUGE website migration from HTTP to HTTPS? I'm talking in excess of 750,00 URLs.

I'm on a project to do just this... and I want to make sure I have my process right as this will also involve archiving old content and making it utilise the current website styling whilst newer content will use the new styling.

Of particular concern is the use of a beta subdomain in the process. The thinking is that we don't want to simply switch off the old site and turn on the new site - all traffic and ranking risks must be minimised and mitigated.

Jaaved Khatree: Thanks for your replies. I'm having a particular problem trying to plan how this will go for our site which is huuuuuuge. I mean it has over 800k URLs in Google's index and the last time they redesigned the site, they broke everything by simply turning off the old one and turning on the new one with no continuity plan, no archiving plan, nothing.

There's talk of eventually placing all old content on archive.domain.com with the same old styling but anything from Jan 2017 onwards will be in the new format. The issue I have is trying to work out when to move to a beta subdomain and smoothly transition everything - if this is even the right way to go about it!

John Romaine: never done anything this big but the basic fundamentals should be the same. Set a redirect all within your htaccess file, preserve link equity, update internal linking, set preferred domain within SC, update prefix in GA, mark an annotation within GA, and test test test.

Our CMS creates URL parameters for images based on the dimensions of the image. As different sized image are automatically created for different purposes, we end up with multiple URLS that are identical, except for the URL parameters e.g.

?width=100&height=100?width=500&height=500?width=1000&height=1000

I have two questions:1. If all of these are allowed to be crawled, is this duplicate content? (I think the answer is "Yes", but I want to check).2. Assuming the answer to the above is "Yes", just how big of an issue is this? I'm trying to work out if this is a critical problem we should fix immediately, or is it typically a lower priority issue?

Any advice/tips/guidance from folks more experienced in this area would be hugely appreciated. :)

Show all 5 comments

Tony “Tiggerito” McCreath: I think +John Mueller one said that the http header canonical does not work for images.

I have an SEO question and I thought I'd ask it here as this has been a great community but I haven't been here for a while. Is it just me or has everyone gone away? I can't see any recent posts no matter how I filter the view.

Show all 5 comments

Maja Jovancevic: We're still here :)

Peter Watson: Its very quiet in this community these days compared to what it once was....... So not just you.

John Romaine: I havent been in here in probably over a year. This interface is beyond ridiculous.

Jake Mabey: Peter, your eagerness to put me in a box says far more about you than about me. Nowhere in my reply did I indicate what the solution for Google was. In fact in every instance I presented it as a conundrum. Conspiracy theories aren't inherently false. They are statistically less likely to be right (Occam's razor and all that), but some conspiracies have been proven true, a la the gulf of Tonkin.

My position on these matters is utterly unknowable from what I've posted so far and yet you ask a question, assume an answer, and attack accordingly? I'm thoroughly unimpressed. The type of quick analysis, broad assumptions, and application of a type that you appear to be displaying are anathema to meaningful discussion.

Please suspend judgement and allow for nuance in discussions if you ever plan on discussions actually being meaningful. If your goal is simply to vent and proclaim your own chosen narrative, then by all means carry on.

Perry Bernard: Come on guys. Keep it light. :-)

Peter Watson: I guess when you expressed your opinion on InfoWars saying it was a shite website I assumed you were defending Google. My original post wasn't asking you to explain to me the situation. Obviously I'm well aware. What I was asking was 'peoples' thoughts on the matter. Sorry if you misinterpreted.